97% kliimateadlaste konsensuslik seisukoht kliima soojenemise inimtekkelisuse põhjustest ja …

“The consensus among nearly all climate scientists (97%) that human-caused global warming is happening is well-established (Anderegg et al., 2010; Cook et al., 2013, 2016; Oreskes, 2004). Yet, millions of Americans do not yet understand that global warming is happening and human-caused, or that nearly all climate scientists have reached consensus on these facts (Leiserowitz et al., 2022).” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1134)

Tundub, et teadlaste kollektiivsel seisukohal on mõju:

“A meta-analysis by Hornsey et al. (2016) covering over 171 studies across 56 nations identified perceived scientific consensus as one of the strongest correlates with public beliefs about climate change.” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1135)

Argumentatsioon on samuti oluline:

“The extent to which individuals employ motivated reasoning may be contingent on other personal characteristics. For instance, when presented with counter-attitudinal information, people are most likely to engage in directional motivated reasoning when they have sufficient motivation and ability to engage in defensive counterarguing (e.g., Taber & Lodge, 2006).” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1139)

Inimesed ei argumenteeri, vaid uuendavad oma uskumusi …

“The theory of Bayesian learning suggests that, instead of being motivated reasoners, people simply update their beliefs in the direction of the information given (Coppock, 2016). This provides a stark contrast with the motivated reasoning model by proposing instead that people update their beliefs in the direction of the information regardless of whether or not a message is counter-attitudinal.” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1140) […] “Importantly, this perspective is consistent with existing research on messaging about the scientific consensus on climate change. That is, people update their beliefs in line with the consensus regardless of their prior beliefs about global warming, political party, or political ideology (van der Linden, Leiserowitz, & Maibach, 2019; also see Goldberg, van der Linden, Ballew, Rosenthal, Gustafson, & Leiserowitz, 2019).” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1140)

Sõnumites tuleb olla järjekindel:

“Put simply: consensus effects should last longer for people who continue to receive information about the consensus than for people who receive no information or information suggesting there is no consensus.” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1142)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“Although the findings provide supportive evidence for the Bayesian learning perspective, this does not rule out the possibility that motivated reasoning is influential in persuasion in general, or in messaging about the scientific consensus on climate change.” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1155)  […] “This study provides evidence that people update their prior climate change beliefs using a Bayesian learning approach: people vary in their existing beliefs, but respond consistently in line with the message provided.” (Goldberg et al., 2022, p. 1156)

Goldberg, M. H., Gustafson, A., van der Linden, S., Rosenthal, S. A., & Leiserowitz, A. (2022). Communicating the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: Diverse Audiences and Effects Over Time. Environment and Behavior54(7–8), 1133–1165. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139165221129539